I have been reading some posts about the above programs and still have a few questions, that are connected together - that's why I put both into the topic title.

What I want to do: backup CDs in the best possible way. That's why I thought to do the following:1.) Rip the CD with the CDRipper included with dbpoweramp and at the same time convert the signal to 24bit/96kHz. Store the files as wav2.) Feed the wav's to dvd+audio - at the moment, this software does not "enhance" the above format in any way, just converts it to LPCM and authors a Video DVD

The idea behind that is, that having backed up the CDs in a format, that new CD/DVD-Players upsample the CD anyway, why not use that format from the start...

So here are my questions

- how good ist the resampling "engine" of dbpoweramp? In other words: would a CD-player, that does the resampling internally "on the fly", be better or worse or as good as the files I get from dbpoweramp. Would a software like CEP do a better job in resampling?- Are there any objections / cons against resampling a 44.1/16 file to 96/24 - can there possibly be a quality loss (I know, that I don't GAIN anything)- What exactly does happen, when a 24bit/96kHz wav is changed to be a LPCM-signal in a DVD-stream?- When "weaving" the 24/96 into the video-signal for the DVD, are there possible changes/errors for the audio-signal (please bear in mind, that the audio-tests in this board were based upon the fact, that DVD+Audio processes the 44.1/16 signal. "My" 24/96 signal is untouched by this process)

As I said, the idea is to backup the CDs in the best possible way and at the same time use an audio-format, that modern DVD-players do use anyway. If CD/DVD-players do an upsampling, why not feed them with the right signal from the start?

Sorry, but that's just plain stupid. All you will do is use 3.25 times as much disk space and lose your ability to burn an exact duplicate of the CD you're backing up. If you need to burn 96/24 in the future, resample then, but right now, everything is 44.1/16.

I don't anticipate the CD going away. 44.1/16 in 99% of listeners and situations sounds just like 96/24, there is no need for more than 2 channels when 99% of audio systems (including cars and portable players) only have two speakers, and there is no need for more than 80 minutes when 99% of albums fit in that time, and a good chunk of those are 50 minutes or less. Add in the fact that mixing and distributing music is more expensive in these new formats than CD, and that DVD players are more expensive than CD players, and people hate spending money, DVD-audio is a dead end even for audiophiles, who will complain because the sound is lossy compressed.

1.) what is a good 1:1 CD copying tool - CloneCD (still have the "old" version somewhere...)? Or is there better freeware out now?

2.) About the resampling - please consider the following: I do not have a CD-Player anymore, I do have a Multiplayer for CD, DVD, SACD and DVDA.I do know, that the Pioneer 565 does resample the CD anyway and does NOT process the 44.1/16 signal plain and direct like a CD-Player would have. So, the basic question is (like with the modern soundcards): how good is the internal resampling process of the player?If I want to avoid the resampling in the player, then I do have to feed it with a signal, that the player accepts "as is" without any further processing but the "decoding". By the way - you are talking of a lossy format. LPCM is NOT lossy, isn't it???

@magic75I was in the middle of writing my reply, when you posted yours - so I did not see it at that time...analogy was talking about a lossy format - hope I did not missunderstand him:

QUOTE

DVD-audio is a dead end even for audiophiles, who will complain because the sound is lossy compressed

About EAC: I tested this program a few days ago - how do you backup? Create an Image and then burn with Nero? Or extract to wav and burn with Nero? I thought, if I want to keep ALL the information of a CD (important for example for HDCDs etc.), I should not extract to wav and then burn again like EAC seems to do it - at least the way I have been using it (that was the main issue when everybody was talking about CloneCD: copying bit by bit exactly, what was on the CD). Mind helping me along with the best "setting" of EAC (and what burning software to use) to backup CDs? I do have a Liteon 165H DVD-ROM and I think I read something about an issue between that drive and EAC, something with the cache or so... (I do have a LiteOn 811S and a Sony DRU 510A for burning)

CloneCD is for data CD:s on which data is stored in a different (and probably better way) than audio CD:s. Audio CD:s have specific issues with how the actual data on them are stored, and I am pretty sure CloneCD does not adress those issues.

Exact Audio Copy is written specifically for adressing these issues and giving you the best possible chance of getting a perfect 1:1 copy. Setting up EAC is quite painful though, as it takes some time. Look in the FAQ for the guide at 'Coaster Factory'. You extract the CD to an Image and then you burn it with EAC as well if your burner is supported. If it isn't supported you should be able to use Nero. I have used Burrrn (free) sucessfully for that task, but EAC is recommended if you are really hysterical of exact copies.

The cache issue you mention is probably about disabling the audio cache of your drive, which is a bit problematic. Not actually disabling it, I am pretty sure EAC does a very good job at doing it. The problem is detecting whether you need to do it for your specific drive or not. The auto detect mechanism for that does not work very well in EAC. To solve that you can either try to find you drive in any of the drive feature listings available (check the FAQ), or you can download Feurio and test your drive more reliably.

I have heard some times that most LiteOn drives do cache audio data, and consequently, the disable cache feature should be turned on for those drives. But you shouldnt trust blindly me on that one...

As for ripping HDCD, I don't really know, but there has been some discussions about that recently. Search.

I did set up EAC and did extractions. I ended up with some tracks being 100% "perfect" and some 98%. Just for curiosity, I clicked on glitch removal. With some of the 100% tracks, the removal just ran through with nothing happening, some though ended up with a number of 400 glitches removed. The "98%" ones did result in a few glitches removed, but nothing that high.What does that tell you?The drive I used was a LiteOn 165H with a +12 offset.

I have not used the deglitch tool in any recent version of EAC, but the old one would trigger all the time even with clean rips (which is why it has that adjustment). I would only use that if you hear problems; don't use it as a glitch "detector". If your CDs are clean you probably aren't getting errors.

Second, keep in mind that if you upsample HDCD rips to 24/96 you will lose the HDCD information (unless there's an upsampler that takes HDCD into account, which I doubt).

I did set up EAC and did extractions. I ended up with some tracks being 100% "perfect" and some 98%.

You have a basic misconception. (At least I didn't call you stupid like that other guy.)

The "Track quality" number (not track "perfection") refers to the track on the CD, not the ripped track. As long as each track says "Copy OK" and at the end it says "No errors occured," the track you ripped is 100% perfect.

That's what EAC does -- it uses various forms of error detection to tell when an error occurs and then it rereads the track until it reads without an error. (It's a little more complicated than that, but that will do for now.) The longer it takes EAC to get a good read of the track, the lower the "Track quality" will be reported. But that doesn't mean the track didn't rip correctly.

Track quality below 100% means that EAC:s error correction kicked in somewhere in the track. As long as it says Copy OK it means that the error correction was succesful. So on those tracks you gained something by using EAC...

Helloand thanks everybody for the insight!To let you know, why I was wondering so much about the 100%: I was using some badly scratched CDs - not only "vertically", but also "horizontally" scratched - so to say "in the groove". Using a Liteon 165H for extraction, I was expecting much more error correction. I just could not imagine, that the drive itself was able to do it all by itself.

Having heard about possible cache-control problems with the Liteon, I of course disabled it in the EAC options , hoping, that EAC REALLY can disable this control in the LiteOn and is not fooled by the drive.

Is there any explanation, why EAC did not show any error correction activity? Or were my CDs not THAT badly scratched.... Extraction speed ways about 12x, by the way...